Skip to main content

View Diary: Groups targeted by IRS pushed political activity boundaries (135 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Yes, that's precisely what O'Donnell pointed out (8+ / 0-)
    An organization is operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare if it is primarily engaged in promoting in some way the common good and general welfare of the people of the community.
    That's the IRS interpretation of the statute, which only says the part about exclusively:
    (A) Civic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare, or local associations of employees, the membership of which is limited to the employees of a designated person or persons in a particular municipality, and the net earnings of which are devoted exclusively to charitable, educational, or recreational purposes.
    (B) Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to an entity unless no part of the net earnings of such entity inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual.

    “What’s the use of having developed a science well enough to make predictions if, in the end, all we’re willing to do is stand around and wait for them to come true?” - Sherwood Rowland

    by jrooth on Tue May 28, 2013 at 01:48:48 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  The IRS interpretation of the statute is illegal (0+ / 0-)

      Who has standing to sue to overturn the illegal regulations?

      A 501(c)(4) must be operated EXCLUSIVELY for the promotion of social welfare.  The IRS interpretation is simply and plainly illegal.  Under the statute, none of these groups, which engaged in direct electioneering, qualify.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site